[fingal]

Originally Posted by bigtomrodney

This made me laugh, not because it was funny but because this is exactly how I see the whole Stallman/FSF side of the debate. You know Moe, I think you and I have more in common that I woulda thought

I don't understand the anti-Stallman stuff though. Without the FSF you wouldn't have any free apps to use. Desist!

[genesus]

Fingal, that's true, even if he has gotten a bit big for his britches...

[techieMoe]

Originally Posted by fingal

I don't understand the anti-Stallman stuff though. Without the FSF you wouldn't have any free apps to use. Desist!

I've prefaced all my anti-Stallman rhetoric in this latest review. I never said he or the FSF hadn't done some nice things in the past, but so have any number of people. The problem I have is with what they both have become, which is whining, increasingly control-mad idealists.

[fingal]

Originally Posted by techieMoe

I've prefaced all my anti-Stallman rhetoric in this latest review. I never said he or the FSF hadn't done some nice things in the past, but so have any number of people. The problem I have is with what they both have become, which is whining, increasingly control-mad idealists.

Would you please qualify those remarks? Actually I genuinely don't understand them. Whining? Control-mad? In what way and how? ... Please give examples. And why is 'idealist' suddenly a dirty word? Without reaching for ideals people tend to remain in the mud. I can't think of a single person I admire who isn't an idealist, and who still has the courage to follow that vision.

To be frank I've seen remarks from other forum members ... about Stallman being 'a nut job'. The other taunt is 'hippy'. I would be rather pleased if someone called me 'a hippy'. I would rather be numbered among the 'weird' than the ineffectual. Surely the FSF and their commitment to maintaining the GPL is the bedrock of what we're trying to uphold here. If not, then I'm very much mistaken about what these forums actually represent.

[techieMoe]

Originally Posted by fingal

Would you please qualify those remarks? Actually I genuinely don't understand them. Whining?

Need I search around for all the times in interviews or essays that Stallman has whined about the use of GNU/Linux instead of Linux? Or the tirades he goes on about Digital Rights Management or his list of "proper terminology"? I consider this whining, because most of the time he says things like this he doesn't offer any substantive way to correct the perceived problem.

Control-mad? In what way and how? ... Please give examples.

I've already given an example of this. The co-creator of gNewSense says that giving the end-user the choice to use proprietary software is "not free". The idea of "free" to the FSF is what they define as "free". In my mind, to be truly free one must have a choice. It's fine if the FSF disagrees with the choice to use proprietary software, but actively trying to prevent that choice is what I define as control-mad.

And why is 'idealist' suddenly a dirty word? Without reaching for ideals people tend to remain in the mud. I can't think of a single person I admire who isn't an idealist, and who still has the courage to follow that vision.

I can't think of a single person I admire... period. To admire someone is to ignore the fact that we're all human and humans by their very nature are flawed, accident-prone beings. There's nothing wrong with an idealist as long as they strive to do practical things in order to try and reach those ideals. Richard Stallman and FSF have decided instead to moan and wag their fingers at those who do not share their extreme beliefs rather than doing something constructive to try and change the situation, the reality in which we all live. The reality is that proprietary software exists and sometimes it's necessary to use it.

To be frank I've seen remarks from other forum members ... about Stallman being 'a nut job'. The other taunt is 'hippy'. I would be rather pleased if someone called me 'a hippy'. I would rather be numbered among the 'weird' than the ineffectual. Surely the FSF and their commitment to maintaining the GPL is the bedrock of what we're trying to uphold here. If not, then I'm very much mistaken about what these forums actually represent.

I'm not trying to "uphold" anything, so I'm apparently not part of your grand scheme. I am a computer enthusiast who uses computers to do things. I work on them, play on them and create on them. I hold no special love for the Free Software Foundation, the GPL, or any of the myriad personalities that exist in the OSS world. Linux is not my religion, it's an operating system. Software. A tool. That is all. If Linux did not fit my needs I would use something else, and if people like the FSF and RMS are the ones leading the future of Linux that may just be where I go: elsewhere. Zealots are always bad, in my opinion.

[eraker]

Originally Posted by techieMoe

I can't think of a single person I admire... period. To admire someone is to ignore the fact that we're all human and humans by their very nature are flawed, accident-prone beings.

I don't mean this as a personal attack, but this statement strikes me as overly cynical and overly simplistic. It's nice to admire people, even with their flaws. In fact, I've admired lots of people in my life because there was a lot to be learned from their mistakes in addition to their successes. Maybe this is taking you too much at your word, but as a response, the imperfections of people are sometimes the best and most illuminating things about them.

[deanlinkous]

Considering that without the GNU part you do not have anything but a kernel I think the GNU is important enough to be part of the name. Basically it means the GNU OS plus the Linux kernel. Originally there was no gnome or kde or anything, you only had the kernel and GNU programs/utilities. Ever tried using just a kernel? And I do not think he whined about it, he simply stated his belief that it should be called that. I mean the guy was interviewed and asked so if he has a reason to think that is what it should be called then I do not see that as whining.


I have never seen RMS speak of a problem without stating what he thought was a solution.

Good thing he use to go on those tirades about free software isn't it or else none of us would likely have a linux. We certainly would not have the GPL.

To have a choice is simply to have a choice. Leg shackles or wrist shackles is a choice - does it feel free? It is not about the idea of "free" as in the general sense but some clearly defined freedoms or rights if you will. The term "freedoms" also implies unrestricted or full access which is what free software is all about. Software freedoms.

You have that choice you speak of anyway. Use windows, be locked in, use proprietary all you want and when you become disgusted with being at their mercy then discover what software freedoms can do for you. I do not see how they are actively trying to prevent that choice.

They are making a free distro, they do not want anything proprietary in it, and they do not want a non-free repository. If they believe in software freedoms then would you expect them to do otherwise? Would you expect PETA to sit down and eat a big bucket of KFC?

I wish I had the energy to continue MY tirade or endure someone elses but I do not.

Why use something if you feel that the reason it exists is a bad thing? I honestly do not understand....

[bigtomrodney]

On the Stallman issue I wouldn't dare say he hasn't had a huge impact on Free Software. I would say that one man's beliefs shouldn't dictate everyone elses. It's one thing to have a leader, but another to be told.

I personally don't agree with the GNU/Linux argument. I don't think GNU should be played out of the equation but lets be practical here - It's known as Linux. It's too late to do anything about that, as the name is already mainstream. Idealism is very beneficial but it is not the end of the matter, it is only the first step. We need to be realistic in what we can achieve. If there is a choice between free software and proprietary I will take Free Software when it does the job. I will avoid situations where I am forced to use proprietary software, but when there is no choice available and I need to use hardware/software for a particular purpose then it's all out the window and I must use the tools that I need for the job. It's as simple as that. Personally I think gNewSense is a waste of the resources that the FSF have. They didn't create anything new here, all they have done is release a crippled Ubuntu. FSF/Stallman and pretty much everyone else including myself point fingers when Commercial companies produce crippled products like region locked DVD players and DRM'd music. Releasing gNewSense is just doing the same thing under a different banner.

I will always be idealist but when it comes to the crunch and decisions need to be made I will make the practical decision which of course will sway more to my idealist beliefs when possible.

My problem with Stallman? I just get the feeling if I invited him into my home, made him a cup of tea and thanked him for writing Emacs, he might just repay me by spending an hour telling me how I was wrong for using that nVidia driver. If this is a movement of the people then why should I hear only one man's voice?

[fingal]

Hi again - I wrote a long and well reasoned response to Moe and bigtom's posts, but then I went and lost it. I blame IE ver. 6, but then 'a bad workman ... '

::EDIT:: I broadly agree with them, but I do admire RMS. Having said that I don't refer to Linux as GNU/Linux very much. I think too much of that is going to alienate the next generation of *nix users. Better to get on with the job of using the software etc.

[techieMoe]

Originally Posted by deanlinkous

And I do not think he whined about it, he simply stated his belief that it should be called that. I mean the guy was interviewed and asked so if he has a reason to think that is what it should be called then I do not see that as whining.

Well, I suppose that's up for interpretation. You don't interpret that as whining. I do. Moving on.

Good thing he use to go on those tirades about free software isn't it or else none of us would likely have a linux. We certainly would not have the GPL.

Ah, no. Richard Stallman had nothing at all to do with the Linux kernel. He actually tried to create his own kernel (remember HURD?) and failed. When he decided he wanted to actually get something out the door, he tapped Linus Torvalds. Linus himself has said that the license under which he releases it isn't all that important, hence why he doesn't want to mess with the GPL version 3, spearheaded by (you guessed it!) RMS and the FSF.

To have a choice is simply to have a choice. Leg shackles or wrist shackles is a choice - does it feel free? It is not about the idea of "free" as in the general sense but some clearly defined freedoms or rights if you will. The term "freedoms" also implies unrestricted or full access which is what free software is all about. Software freedoms.

Don't take this personally, but I could give a damn what it "feels like". We could argue until we're blue in the face about what "freedom" means. You apparently subscribe to the idea that what the FSF tells you is free is the way and the light. Great, have fun with that. I disagree.

You have that choice you speak of anyway. Use windows, be locked in, use proprietary all you want and when you become disgusted with being at their mercy then discover what software freedoms can do for you. I do not see how they are actively trying to prevent that choice.

That's just a red herring. Nowhere did I even mention MS Windows in this argument. Let's stick to the topic at hand.

They are making a free distro, they do not want anything proprietary in it, and they do not want a non-free repository. If they believe in software freedoms then would you expect them to do otherwise? Would you expect PETA to sit down and eat a big bucket of KFC?

Of course not, but I have a very low opinion of organizations like PETA. If the Free Software Foundation wants to associate itself with something like that, they get lumped into my "loony" file.

Why use something if you feel that the reason it exists is a bad thing? I honestly do not understand....

Where did you get the impression I'm using gNewSense? I ran it long enough to write a rant on it and now the CD is in my trash bin.